The sky-high aircraft and aviation thread

It means they don't need to look for upgraded ear protection for flight deck crews.

I guess they don't consider that enemy Anti-Air will simply look up in the sky wondering "WHAT THE FUCK IS THAT LOUD NOISE! SHOOT IT DOWN!".

The F-117 was how to do stealth aircraft right. It was so quiet you'd think it wasn't there.

Yet somehow the Serbs still managed to knock it out.

How exactly did that happen? I always heard one flew too low and AAA operator got him.

Consequence of predictable flight pathing on the part of the Air Force. The Serbs were smarter than the Iraqis and Panamanians.

That and apparently they fired all the missiles and guns at what they thought was possibly something on radar that was bouncing in and out and got lucky.

edited 26th Nov '14 3:58:39 PM by MajorTom

It was due to a few things:

• Planners got real lazy. Like they'd just re-use flight paths day in and day out, and I think they'd also recycle callsigns too? This allowed the Yugoslavian SAM crews to predict who was going to be where with a fair amount of accuracy.

• The SAM battery - a SA-3 Goa - used a modified radar that used long wavelength signals that, despite its limited ability to detect targets, could pick up the F-117A.

• The Goa spammed missiles until it achieved a hit.

That's just my recollection, though.

I recall also hearing about using something to help guide the missile after they had visually spotted the air craft.

The Tamara passive detection system (NATO name "Trashcan") may have heard the radio chatter.

They were looking and got a better lock when the F-117's bay doors were open.

The writeup on The Other Wiki: 1999 F-117A shootdown...

In short, a lot had to coincide for that F-117A to be brought back down to earth with a bang - though I still think it's a salutary lesson for anyone who thinks stealth is a "I Win" button.

It isn't, stealth is just another tool in the toolbox and the F-117 was 20 year old tech when it flew over Serbia.

Which the Russians knew about before the thing ever had its maiden flight. The GRU and KGB did not fuck around on matters like this. If the Nighthawk ever had been sent against front line Soviet radar hardware the results would have been even uglier than happened over Serbia.

Of course the CIA blamed Bill Sweetman, the British-American aviation journalist, for all of this knowledge being passed to the damned Russkies - as part of their standard "blame the reporter" defence. Rather than admit to just how badly the program's security was penetrated.

So the F-117 can be detected what about the F-22 or the F-35? They're not exactly young planes, are they entirely safe?

They have reduced radar signature, not true stealth. They'll show up on radar systems that the F-117 and B-2 won't.

Put it this way, it's good enough that they won't be swatted out of the sky by S-300s at their maximum range and might actually get close enough to kill said SAM's. However it's riding a razor's edge in how not safe you'll be on such a mission.

Of course, the F-22 and F-35 have no stealth capabilities against IR systems. Unlike the B-2 and F-117, they have pretty large IR sigs.

Hmm. That's a bit of a tough one, actually, but... No. Remember what I said about the GRU and KGB not fucking around? Well, the GRU still doesn't and neither does the successor agency to the KGB involved in external intelligence, whatever they call it this week. According to Wikepedia that would be the SVR.

They'd probably work against the American air defense network (which they are tested against, or so I have read), but the Russians would more than likely annihilate them or at the very least radically reduce their numbers, which aren't all that high to begin with.

Stealth really only works against radar systems that don't know how to look for them. It really doesn't completely work against infra-red tracking, which sucks because all jet engines, no matter how ludicrously expensive the planes that have them inside them are, leave exhaust plumes with hot gasses. The F-35 and F-22 may have systems designed to alter and minimize those exhaust plumes but they can't eliminate them. Plus the airframes themselves get hot as they pass through the air.

And the Russians have kit that tracks that as well. Stealth really is a misnomer if folks are taking it to mean that the planes can't be found at all. Nothing's that simple. A lot of people forget that the Russians sell radars, missile guidance systems and other kit like that to other nations that they would not be seen dead using themselves. And the buyers know this, of course. They aren't stupid. The kit is still better than anything they can make themselves which is why they still buy it.

So it just makes their lives a bit more difficult instead of being outright invisible at long range then. Close or maybe medium range they'll show up and on IR they're just as visible as anything else.

At the end of the day it's a nice feature but not an ace in the hole. I figured that was the case.

Wonder if the Russians had that in mind, supposedly the PAK-FA traded some stealthiness for extra armor, maneuverability and weapons payload. Their 5th gen fighter feels more like one brutal air superiority craft with stealth added in as an afterthought.

edited 27th Nov '14 6:21:48 PM by LeGarcon

^ The Chengdu J-20 and the Shenyang J-31 are the same way. Less reliance on stealth, more a "nice to have".

Both of those craft will kick the shit out of an F-35 unless that Pigeon pilot is a fucking Ace of Aces.

edited 27th Nov '14 6:36:34 PM by MajorTom

As good as people think the KGB and GRU are, the F-117 did scare the piss out of the USSR. Remember, they didn't have the supercomputers nor the resources to make a stealth design before the mid-90's. They thought that the D-21 was the height of stealth and both Lockheed and the USAF were cool with that.

Also, NATO had just Hawk and Patriot (and some old Nike batteries), the USSR and Warsaw pact had dozens of types of radar. It just wasn't a priority until the turn of the century.

The vaunted PAK-FA is stealthy only in the front, less in the IR.

Every year there is some new "counter stealth" technology, and every year it never pans out.

Every year depending on what paper or website you choose to visit. Stealth isn't the panacea it is claimed to be. At best, and I'm being really generous here, against first line Russian air defense systems the new fighters are only marginally better protected against being scanned and tracked and killed than the older ones.

At worst, well, the Americans (and us idiot Brits who are also getting in bed with the F-35 for purely chauvinistic reasons - we don't want our boys to fly in those nasty new-generation Rafales, no sireebob, and we are too fucking thick to equip our Queen series carriers with CATOBAR as well) are tossing trillions of dollars down the hole if things ever get really hectic with the now Angry Bear, and those fighters ever do get twatted at the Russian borders if their IADS works the way I and many others think it will do.

Not knowing how to build things never really prevents knowing how to destroy them, and thinking Russian engineers are stupid or incompetent is really dangerous ground to start tap-dancing on. Particularly when they have the blue-prints of our stuff to look at.

On that note, remember how badly compromised the Manhattan Project was, and that was at least as important to actually ending the Second World War in 1945 was as anything else you could mention. Stealth is given the same amount of importance by politicians and military top brass, so do you really think that things are any different now?

Always assume the worst when it comes to what Ivan can and can't do. You'd rather be pleasantly surprised than horrified

Always assume the worst when it comes to what Ivan your enemies can and can't do. You'd rather be pleasantly surprised than horrified

Fixed it.

Is the PAK-FA any good? Maybe.

Unlike Fatman and Little Boy copies, the Ruskies are having more problems getting their superjet off the ground.

• Indian Air Force unhappy at progress of PAK-FA fifth-gen fighter

• The Russian Air Force's Super Weapon: Beware the PAK-FA Stealth Fighter:

If there is one thing the US does well, it's the network.

edited 27th Nov '14 8:22:27 PM by TairaMai

Hmm, I have doubts about that. The Su-35S can already eat an F-35 and most of the teen series for breakfast on paper and that was built with leftovers from the Su-47, Su-37, and PAK-FA. They spent a lot on electronics and the like for the PAK-FA. The F-22 is 20 years old now, a lot of those bleeding edge features are becoming standard everywhere, I see no reason why the Russians wouldn't be on top of these things considering they were the ones who came up with things like a helmet mounted HUD.

Not too concerned with the first one though, Russia's always hold her cards close to her chest when it comes to the really good gear and everything experiences hiccups in development.

edited 27th Nov '14 8:34:24 PM by LeGarcon

The American aircraft industry HAS to decry the performance of the PAK-FA. If they do it loudly enough, they hope, folks will stop asking the awkward questions of just how badly it would fuck up the STOVL version of the Pigeon once it gets into regimental status. And the CTOL. And more than likely the CV version. Instead of you know, going, "FUCK! Rethink. Forget everything we said about the F-35, it's all been bullshit".

Sunk Cost Fallacy + Emperor's New Clothes = the F-35 program in a nutshell.

And China's got some new toys too.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20141122/DEFREG03/311220016/China-s-Anti-Stealth-Radar-Comes-Fruition

The Chinese are good at this war thing, if you remember. One of their guys wrote the book, after all..

You. Are. Kidding. Me. Amazon Kindle had it at 39 pence?!? Sold, mofo.

edit

Wonder if they have "On War"?

edit

They do. War geek nerdgasm. Mine, please!!!

edited 27th Nov '14 11:31:36 PM by TamH70

Something odd: How common are "satellite-proof" hangars of the sorts used at Area 51 at US military airfields? I doubt there are actually enough lying about that aren't already earmarked for F-22s, B-1s, B-2s and F-35s for the Americans to stuff a certain Boeing 777 in one. If the question of why the Russians haven't tried forging a photo of said 777 at an American airbase isn't curious enough...

-Depends on the definition of "satellite-proof". I dunno really. Maybe quite a few given how big CONUS actually is as a landmass.

Well China used to be good at the war thing. How good is the J-20? Everything else in their military is mediocre at best. The idea of them somehow being able to make gear that can compete with ours or Russia's is a bit unexpected.